Licence text and fabs
Posted Oct 4, 2006 20:51 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim
In reply to: Licence text and fabs
Parent article: Busy busy busybox
> The thing i'm talking about here is that the GPLv3 includes another work
> (the key) which is independent of our GPL-ed works, in the definition of
> Source Code, which source code we purport to license!
I can't imagine how anyone could construct the key as a "work", it costs nothing to create or duplicate.
Take the same hardware with and without DRM. It should be painfully obvious the only "value" "created" by adding DRM and making it apply on GPLed software is the possibility to stop the accesses the GPLv2 used to imply reneging on part of the "payment" for GPLed code use.
Someone has been breaking a bargain. Someone has been extending itself unilaterally without counterpart. Is this someone the FSF? I don't think so
to post comments)